It's tough for me to have a firm opinion without knowing the specifics of his departure. I've always considered Lebby's "competition is beneficial" to be a generalization pertaining to co-operative peers. When I read your post about Yasufumi Enami I figured most people wouldn't consider it positive. I doubt him teaching in Japan has any impact on Lightwave. But I don't think many knew about him removing his connection to Lightwave on LinkedIn. But, for better or worse, the truth should never be left out.
I would generally prefer anyone with intimate knowledge of the company not go out to compete with us. Fortunately, he didn't go off to build micro-ring modulators instead.
If he was let go due to some failures/shortcomings; do we benefit from him potentially creating subpar offerings and engineers? Would that help with perception and acceptance of polymers? Or is he exceedingly talented and left on his own? Creative differences maybe. That wouldn't be net positive. I think he was let go, but can't prove it. I didn't know we had a monopoly with our IP protection. I thought a peer could still independently emerge as the dominant player.
In the past when someone broke off from Lightwave (Dr. Mickelson, Dr. Arduengo ect) there was mostly suspicion directed at them. One investor even filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out more. Our vast IP is protected much much better under Lebby but my inclination is still towards being cautious. I'm glad to see that Lebby doesn't throw departing staff under the bus. He has too much class.
